click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
CSPAN 5
MSNBCW 2
CNBC 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 10
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
the foreign- policy support. famously, they both worked to speak harsh truths about the unsustainability of the soviet union, something that coincided with the implosion of the soviet union under its own contradiction. some conservatives will tell you it was almost sort of like moses parting the red sea. they tear it all down. i don't think it was quite that. but clearly the truth telling to the soviet union was not a relevant and gave enormous hope to dissidents working behind the eastern block. domestically, they had a tremendously important impact on each other. they were both trying something, not identical but something very radical that was a kind of break with the economic policies and domestic policies of the past. the fact they were not isolated, that they could support to -- point to someone else on the other side of the ocean in charge of the important country who was doing the same thing, that make quite a difference, i think. you can see in the tributes paid to lady thatcher that people who work closely with president reagan said it made a difference. there is this impressiv
of charges that becomes a big foreign policy problem. that's one of the reasons why the state department was so opposed to the waterboarding under colin powell. >> exactly. to have it labeled -- so then you get into the territory of were crimes committed? and what kind of future implications there are for that. >> briefly, before i let you go. we do want to talk about it in more detail, the book. the appreciate now to move the program from the cia back to where many say it afc belonged in the military where there could be more oversight. what you've uncovered is the extent of secret relationships with pakistan, things that have never been reported, never been revealed, i guess, to other than the intel gens community? >> i think when you look at the history of the secret war since 9/11, there's so much that's gone on in the shadows that we have not known about and not certainly told to the public or told to congress. as you said, pressure is building to become more transparent. president obama set in the state of the union there would be more transparency, and we'll see what happens. >> t
rights foreign policy. it is not a foreign policy priorities and because it is the right thing to do. it is tied to our own security. it is tied to the possibility of prosperity and nation's living by rule of law. countries were strong human- rights prevail are countries where people do better. economy strive, rules of law are better. there are countries that lead on the world's station project stability across the regions. strong respect for human rights is not merely an indicator that the country is likely doing unleashes a country's potential. it helps to advance growth and progress. of a countrythink like burma for a minute. because of its steps towards democratic reform, a country that has been isolated for years is now making progress. has it reached for rwanda to be? no. but it is on the road. it is moving. more people are contributing to the economy and participating in the government, leading to faster growth and development. by starting to embrace universal rights the government is opening the doors to a stronger partnership with their neighborhood -- with their neighborhoo
unwavering in her support of president reagan. just the foreign- policy support. famously, they both worked to sort of speak half-truths about the unsustainability of the soviet union, something that coincided with the placing of the soviet union under its own contradiction. some will tell you it was almost like moses parting the red sea. i don't think it was quite that. but clearly, the truth telling was not irrelevant. hope tonor ms. dissidents working behind the eastern bloc. domestically, they had a -- theyusly important were trying something very radical. they wanted a break with the economic policies of the past. the fact that they were not isolated, they could point to someone on the other side of the ocean in charge of this was important. that made quite a difference. you can see in the tributes paid to lady thatcher, people who work closely to president reagan saying it made a difference. he is not on his own. there is an impressive leader in europe who shares his ideas. host: was it vice versa for her in britain? guest: it was. famously, they got along well. but there were differe
. and really at the heart of it is the fact that one of obama's enduring legacies when it comes to foreign policy, he has solidified assassination as an essential component of policy. >> they can do it in the shadows, as you pointed out. in the book, i would say there hasn't been a lot of public resistance aside from people like you and others in the press. how have they done this without facing much resistance? publicly or inside the government from people who should be stepping up and saying, wait a minute, we can't kill u.s. citizens without due process? >> right, i think there's no question that if john mccain had won the election in 2008 or mitt romney had won it in 2012 that liberals would be screaming about this stuff and saying, you know, that -- there would be this thing, war crimes, we should do impeachment and the reality is that i think a lot of people -- and i think this is sincere. a lot of people so fed up with the iraq war, perceived as the sort of crimes of the bush administration they wanted it to end and the obama administration has sold people a bill of goods. the idea
families have skin in the game of foreign policy, but if you don't a son or daughter in uniform, husband or wife in uniform, where is your skin in that game when you're not paying for those decisions? and when we make decisions that we don't have to pay for, we make bad decisions. i agree with the president. folks need to pay their fair share. i think we all need to have some skin in the game. folks who make more ought to pay more. folks who make less ought to pay less. but we are all members of the board of directors of the united states of america, mr. speaker. all 320 million of us sit on the board of directors of the united states of america, and yet you ought to have skin in the game when you are making decisions about high this organization runs. how do we create revenue? how do we reduce deficits? how do we make sure folks are paying their fair share? the good news is, mr. speaker, the president's aware of the fair tax. i am not willing to call him a fair tax president. i don't think the president's quite onboard, we are not going to wait on the president to be onboard. we are goi
because of president obama's foreign policy with regard to terrorism. that would also be outrageous. >> there are two sides to this fence. don't politicize an event like this. don't do it. that's opinion, okay. >>steve: stuart varney is going to have a lot to talk about over at fox business today, 9:20 eastern time where he takes control of that channel each and every week. all right, stewart. >>gretchen: coming up, boston has a message for the attacker. we'll show you how citizens are speaking out now. >>brian: a dad passes out behind the wheel, and his young kids spring into action. >> we're going 90. >>brian: the outcome? >>brian: the outcome? nothing short of a miracle. with its foot-activated lift gate. but that's not all you'll see, cause c-max also beats prius v, with better mpg. say hi to the 47 combined mpg c-max hybrid. bjorn earns unlimited rewas for his small business take theseags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjors small busiss earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth why settle for less? ahh, oh!
partner for me in foreign policy but a good friend. >> do you miss her around here? >> i do. she's earned her rest and i know that whatever she does, she's going to be able to continue to be a leader and incredibly positive force for the causes i care about and that she cares about, all around the world. >> the president not able to endorse the vice president. >> who is walking down the hall as you talk to him. >>> let's go to a florida neighborhood that has seen a remarkable turnaround thanks in part to the efforts of one generous man. here's nbc's gabe gutierrez. >> reporter: in the theme park capital of the world, hospitality means big business. >> thank you so much. appreciate it. >> reporter: but to harris rosen, it means much more. >> thank you. >> hospitality really is appreciating a fellow human being. >> reporter: he grew up in the slums of new york, a family of immigrants. now he runs seven hotels in orlando, his self-made success would be remarkable on its own but that's not what he's most proud of. >> came to the realization that i really had to now say thank you. >> reporter:
things that thatcher government did was scrap foreign exchange controls when it came to power in the late 1970s. so absolutely. privatization, eventual greater competition within the previously owned government sectors was a big plus. and obviously one contentious p policy was power between employers and trade unions. arguably now the u.k. has a much better industrial relations record than it did before 1979. >> you have to remember though in the '70s, you and i were doing our homework by candlelight when we had a three-day week. it did need rebalancing from that point of view. takes those lessons from those micropolicies which were successful whether there's some lessons today that need to be drawn by this current government because they are trying to kick-start wider only ownership but thatcher gave people the right to own their own homes but they had to qualify for mortgage on affordable income. >> that's one thing which the thatcher government did particularly in the early to mid 1980s. the big liberalization financial markets. scrapping of competition and credit control happened a lo
characterized the treatment as torture when used by foreign governments. the c.i.a. recognized this in an internal review and realized many of the interrogation techniques employed were contrary with the policy the u.s. has taken regarding human rights. the united states is understandably subject to criticism when it criticizes another nation for engaging in torture and then justifies the same conduct under national security arguments. there are those that defend the techniques like waterboarding, stress positions, and sleep deprivation because there was the office of legal council which issued a decision approving of their use because they defined them as not being torture. those decisions have since been repudiated by the o.l.c. it's sefment even in it's peap it relies not only on a narrow definition of torture but also on factual representation about how the techniques would be implemented that later proved inaccurate. this is important context as to how the opinion came about, but also as to how policymakers relied upon it. based upon a thorough review of the available reco
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10